Design and Evaluation of an in-Plane Shear Test for Fracture Characterization of High Ductility Metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fracture characterization of automotive metals under simple shear deformation is critical for the calibration of advanced fracture models employed in forming and crash simulations. In-plane shear fracture tests of high ductility materials have proved challenging since the sample edge fails first in uniaxial tension before the fracture limit in shear is reached at the center of the gage region. Although through-thickness machining is undesirable, it appears required to promote higher strains within the shear zone. The present study seeks to adapt existing in-plane shear geometries, which have otherwise been successful for many automotive materials, to have a local shear zone with a reduced thickness. It is demonstrated that a novel shear zone with a pocket resembling a “peanut” can promote shear fracture within the shear zone while reducing the risk for edge fracture. An emphasis was placed upon machinability and surface quality for the design of the pocket in the shear zone. A mild steel and two high strength aluminum alloys were tested using both conventional and modified shear geometries with digital image correlation techniques utilized for strain measurement. The modified geometry increased the equivalent fracture strains of the low and medium ductility aluminum alloys by a respective 24% and 41% relative to the conventional geometry. For the mild steel, the conventional shear geometry failed prematurely at the edges. Edge failure still occurred in the modified geometry but achieved an equivalent strain magnitude of over 300% which is a 62% increase relative to the conventional geometry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".